Aguilera v. Stinson

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Aguilera v. Stinson

233 A.D.2d 628, 649 N.Y.S.2d 849, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11740

CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

DecidedNovember 14, 1996

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 233 A.D.2d 628 (Aguilera v. Stinson) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Aguilera v. Stinson, 233 A.D.2d 628, 649 N.Y.S.2d 849, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11740 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1996).

Pincite

Opinion

Proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 (transferred to this Court by order of the Supreme Court, entered in Albany County) to review a determination of respondent Superintendent of Great Meadow Correctional Facility which found petitioner guilty of violating a prison disciplinary rule.

[629]*629Petitioner was found guilty of violating a prison disciplinary rule prohibiting the intentional exposure of one’s private bodily parts. Petitioner challenges the determination of his guilt on the ground that it was not based upon substantial evidence. We disagree.

Adduced in evidence against petitioner was a misbehavior report written by the facility’s chaplain. It stated that petitioner was attending a religion class at the facility when he pulled his penis out of his trousers, exposing it to the civilian volunteer who was conducting the class and who immediately reported the incident to the chaplain. We find that the misbehavior report was sufficiently "relevant and probative” to constitute substantial evidence of petitioner’s guilt (see, Matter of Foster v Coughlin, 76 NY2d 964, 966; Matter of Perez v Wilmot, 67 NY2d 615, 616-617).

Mikoll, J. P., Crew III, White, Spain and Carpinello, JJ., concur. Adjudged that the determination is confirmed, without costs, and petition dismissed.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 (transferred to this Court by order of the Supreme Court, entered in Albany County) to review a determination of respondent Superintendent of Great Meadow Correctional Facility which found petitioner guilty of violating a prison disciplinary rule.

[629]*629Petitioner was found guilty of violating a prison disciplinary rule prohibiting the intentional exposure of one’s private bodily parts. Petitioner challenges the determination of his guilt on the ground that it was not based upon substantial evidence. We disagree.

Adduced in evidence against petitioner was a misbehavior report written by the facility’s chaplain. It stated that petitioner was attending a religion class at the facility when he pulled his penis out of his trousers, exposing it to the civilian volunteer who was conducting the class and who immediately reported the incident to the chaplain. We find that the misbehavior report was sufficiently "relevant and probative” to constitute substantial evidence of petitioner’s guilt (see, Matter of Foster v Coughlin, 76 NY2d 964, 966; Matter of Perez v Wilmot, 67 NY2d 615, 616-617).

Mikoll, J. P., Crew III, White, Spain and Carpinello, JJ., concur. Adjudged that the determination is confirmed, without costs, and petition dismissed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

233 A.D.2d 628, 649 N.Y.S.2d 849, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11740, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/aguilera-v-stinson-nyappdiv-1996.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack